Solve PDE u_t=u_xx-u_x with Separation of Variables

  • Thread starter Thread starter Uku
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pde
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
8 replies · 4K views
Uku
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
Hi! Merry christmas!

Homework Statement


[tex]u_{t}=u_{xx}-u_{x}[/tex]

Can I solve it with separation of variables?

The Attempt at a Solution


[tex]u=XT[/tex]
[tex]XT^{'}=T(X^{''}-X^{'})[/tex]
After rearranging
[tex]\frac{T^{'}}{T}=-\lambda^{2}[/tex] 1)
[tex]\frac{X^{''}}{X} - frac{X^{'}}{X}=-\lambda^{2}[/tex]
The solution to 1) is simple
[tex]T=Acos(\lambda t)+Bsin(\lambda t)[/tex]
Now, for the X, I write out a characteristic equation and get that
[tex]X=Ce^{\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - \lambda^{2}}x}+De^{\frac{1}{2}-\sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - \lambda^{2}}x}[/tex]
Since u=XT, the solution would be:
[tex]XT=(Acos(\lambda t)+Bsin(\lambda t))(Ce^{\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - \lambda^{2}}x}+De^{\frac{1}{2} - \sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - \lambda^{2}}x})[/tex]

Now, have I done it wrong?
(I know that I have not checked, I will do it now)

Thanks,
Uku
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Uku said:
Hi! Merry christmas!

Homework Statement


[tex]u_{t}=u_{xx}-u_{x}[/tex]

Can I solve it with separation of variables?

The Attempt at a Solution


[tex]u=XT[/tex]
[tex]XT^{'}=T(X^{''}-X^{'})[/tex]
After rearranging
[tex]\frac{T^{'}}{T}=-\lambda^{2}[/tex] 1)
[tex]\frac{X^{''}}{X} - frac{X^{'}}{X}=-\lambda^{2}[/tex]
Do you know that this constant is negative? That usually is determined by boundary conditions and you don't give any here.

[tex]The solution to 1) is simple<br /> [tex]T=Acos(\lambda t)+Bsin(\lambda t)[/tex]<br /> Now, for the X, I write out a characteristic equation and get that<br /> [tex]X=Ce^{\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{1}{4}-}\lambda^{2}}+De^{\frac{1}{2}-\sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - \lambda^{2}}}[/tex][/tex]
[tex] Only if [itex]\lambda^2< 1/4[/itex], otherwise you will have trig functions. Also you have forgotten the variable, x!<br /> <br /> <blockquote data-attributes="" data-quote="" data-source="" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch"> <div class="bbCodeBlock-content"> <div class="bbCodeBlock-expandContent js-expandContent "> Since u=XT, the solution would be:<br /> [tex]XT=(Acos(\lambda t)+Bsin(\lambda t))(Ce^{\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{1}{4}-}\lambda^{2}}+De^{\frac{1}{2}-\sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - \lambda^{2}}})[/tex]<br /> <br /> Now, have I done it wrong? <br /> (I know that I have not checked, I will do it now)<br /> <br /> Thanks,<br /> Uku </div> </div> </blockquote> What boundary and initial conditions do you have? With partial differential equations, even the form of the solution will depend on them.[/tex]
 
Hi Uku! :smile:

(have a lambda: λ :wink:)

You're getting confused between λ and λ2 in both your X and T equations. :wink:
 
The equation is linear and with constant coefficients. If you present it in the form:

[tex] u(x, t) = e^{a x + b t} \, v(x, t)[/tex]

you can choose a and b to cancel the first partial derivative w.r.t. x and the term with no partial derivatives:

[tex] v_{t} + b v = v_{x x} +2 a v_{x} + a^{2} v - v_{x} - a v[/tex]

Choosing:

[tex] \left\{\begin{array}{l}<br /> 2 a - 1 = 0 \\<br /> <br /> a^2 - a = b<br /> \end{array}\right.[/tex]

after which the equation becomes a pure parabolic equation:

[tex] v_{t} = v_{x x}[/tex]

You can solve this PDE by the method of integral transforms. For example, represent the x-dependence as a Fourier transform:

[tex] v(x, t) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}{\tilde{v}(k, t) \exp(i k x) \, \frac{d k}{2 \pi}}[/tex]

after which you get the 1st order ODE

[tex] \tilde{v}_{t} + k^{2} \, \tilde{v} = 0[/tex]

which has the simple solution:

[tex] \tilde{v}(t, k) = \tilde{v}(0, k) e^{-k^{2} t}[/tex]

where the initial condition is given by:

[tex] \tilde{v}(0, k) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}{v(0, \xi) \exp(-i k \xi) d\xi}, \; v(0, x) = e^{-a x} u(0, x)[/tex]

After you combine everything together and do the integral over k which is gaussian, you will get the general solution as an integral over the initial value.
 
Hi!

I messed up on the lamdas, yes. On [tex]T[/tex] it should be just [tex]\lambda[/tex].
My initial conditions are:
[tex]-\infty < x < \infty[/tex]
[tex]0 < t < \infty[/tex]
[tex]u(x,0)=f(x)[/tex]

How do these tell me wether lamda is negative or not? I got a book, but I'm not getting to the point from it.

EDIT: I forgot the x from the exponential in the initial post, I added it.
 
Hi Uku! :smile:

(what happened to that λ I gave you? :confused:)
Uku said:
How do these tell me wether lamda is negative or not?

λ is a constant of integration.

It can be anything … you find it from your initial (or boundary) conditions …

what are they?​
 
Tim, thanks for the lamda? :)

I have an initial condition
[tex]u(x,0)=f(x)[/tex]
telling me that at t=0 the temperature (the equation looks as a heat conduction eq for a bar of something) depends on position only.

Then I have boundary conditions for the variables
[tex]- \infty < x < \infty[/tex]
telling me that the bar is infinite in both directions, and
[tex]0 < t < \infty[/tex]
telling me that the time changes from 0 to inf.

As I understand the lamda comes from assuming that once the variables are separated, each side depends on only X (or Y). For the equality to hold the constant needs to be the same for both sides, hence the X'/X=c Y'/Y=c part.

If I try to link a boundary to c, I can think of, in
X'-Xc=0
that c scales the position X, so in that case c also must subdue to
-infinity < c < infinity?

I don't yet see a clear link with the initial (bound.) conditions.

Uku
 
Last edited:
Hi Uku! :smile:

What is f(x)?

On its own, u(x,0)=f(x) is only stating the obvious … "u(x,0) does not depend on t".

And (-∞.∞) isn't a boundary condition, it's only a boundary.